Page images
PDF
EPUB

rolling stock placed in service before | preciation on a farm in Vermont or 1975.

The railroad package included in the bill also allows the cost of railroad gradings and tunnel bores, which at present may not be written off, to be amortized over a 50-year period. In addition the package allows railroads to write off rolling stock repair costs up to 20 percent of the rolling stock's original cost each year.

a poultry farm in some other State.

I have always felt we should allow more rapid depreciation rates for all buildings and equipment, but depletion rates should apply to all taxpayers, not just to a few select groups.

Mr. PEARSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. I I have no time remaining.

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I yield

These special incentives included in the bill are an unwarranted and inap-myself such time as I have remaining. propriate use of the tax laws. There The PRESIDING OFFICER. The has been no adequate showing that Senator has 3 minutes remaining. these special incentives will, in fact, Mr. LONG. Mr. President, this help to achieve their respective goals. amendment should be rejected. There More than likely these special incen- may be some merit to some parts of tives will only serve to provide undue the Gore amendment but there are tax benefits to a small number of tax- other parts that are totally without payers in the eventual large amount merit. For example, the House of Repof $555 million a year. resentatives sent us a provision that

Mr. GORE. Mr. President, will the would cost the Treasury $400 million Senator yield?

Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. I yield.

Mr. GORE. Mr. President, in the colloquy just engaged in on this side of the aisle by the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. RIBICOFF), both of them made commendable statements about the need for pollution control, but nothing that either one of them said had any bearing on the syndicate loophole. The same example I pointed out in the RECORD with respect to syndicate investment in a railroad locomotive would apply to an investment in machinery for pollution control. The Senator said they make no profit out of this. Of course not. But the syndicate will buy it under this loophole.

by allowing a 5-year writeoff on pollution-control devices. The Senate committee reduced that to a provision which would cost less than onethird that much-only $120 million a year. The Senate committee would provide a 5-year amortization between now and 1974 for pollution-control devices which are installed, not on the new plants that will be built-they get no advantage-but on existing plants.

As far as people who own and operate plants are concerned, the requirement to install pollution control equipment is nothing more than a burden imposed upon them by Government. They do not want pollutionontrol devices. We are making them install this equipment under State and Federal law, and we now are allowing them 5 years to write it off. The equipment does not improve the operation of the plant.

It is an added cost to them which they do not want.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr. President, I do not see why we should make the depreciation rate so much more liberal for these groups while at the same time we are restricting the We are imposing the burden on depreciation rates allowed to all other them. So we are easing that burden American taxpayers, whether it be de- | by giving them 5 years to write off

the costs of installing them in exist- |“used." This opens up the syndicate ing plants. loophole. And it is a big one.

With regard to the second item, which would cost more than the other two put together, the $15,000 allowance is for rehabilitation of housing units in slum areas. It would allow no more than $15,000 per unit for rehabilitation of housing in slum areas. That provision was asked for by Secretary Romney of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It initially was agreed to by the House, and then was approved by the Senate Finance Committee. It is an incentive of $330 million to provide poor people with better housing.

What on earth is wrong with that? I have not yet heard the first argument developed. If we want people living in slums in Washington, New York, Philadelphia, or elsewhere, to have better housing, cleaner housing, fewer rats, and more sanitation, then vote against the Gore amendment.

If the Senator wants to come back and offer his railroad amendment again, he can, but I submit that we need more new railroad rolling stock. The Treasury has recommended it. I think it should be agreed to.

Let me read what a committee of experts on pollution recommended. The committee was made up of representatives of the Bureau of the Budget, Treasury Department, Council of Economic Advisers, Water Resources Council, Office of Science and Technology, Department of the Interior, Department of Commerce, De

[p. 37887]

partment of HEW, and the Resources of the Future Committee. What do they say?

In summary, clearly tax writeoffs are not

needed nor are they a desirable form of offering further assistance to industries.

Mr. President, this is not a profitmaking undertaking except for the syndicates. That is what the provision in the committee bill makes possible.

Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator from Tennessee yield? Mr. GORE. I yield.

Mr. MUSKIE. The report to which the Senator refers was made by the same representatives from the last

I hope the amendment will be re-administration who opposed a conjected.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the amendment has now ex

pired.

Mr. GORE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time be extended by 4 minutes, with 2 minutes to a side.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Tennessee? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

The Senator from Tennessee is recognized for 2 minutes.

Mr. GORE. Mr. President, for the last week, it has been rolling stock. Now it is pollution we hear about. No one defends the change of words. On page 443 of the bill it changes the House requirement from "owned" to

tinuing grant program for waste treatment.

Mr. LONG. Mr. President, the Senator quoted from a report that considered the proposal relating to new plants as well as existing plants. It was partly because of that logic that the committee said it would not allow

a rapid tax writeoff, or any tax advantage, for pollution control equipment in new plants. The people who build new plants will have to do it themselves by designing pollution control equipment and processes into their new plants, and they will receive no special tax advantage. In doing so, we save $280 million out of $400 million. The $120 million we retained applies to any situation where someone is required to add to an exist

be continued unless they accomplish
desired purpose.

the

ing plant pollution control devices these provisions expire on January 1, 1975, which are of no productive advantage thereby giving assurances that they will not to them whatever. These are costs which we will let them write off over 5 years.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Louisiana yield?

Mr. LONG. I yield.

Sincerely yours,

CHARLES E. WALKER,
Acting Secretary.

CONGRESS SHOULD NOT WEAKEN THE
PROGRAM FOR POLLUTION CONTROL

Mr. MILLER. The Senator from Tennessee read something to the effect Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, that writeoffs would be no incentive. it is vital to the maintenance of naI hope he does not mean by that that tional policy of air and water polluthe base would not be entitled to reg- tion control that the language of secular depreciation or to a double de- tion 704 of H.R. 43270, as reported clining balance depreciation for that by the Finance Committee, be reis another form of writeoff. The quick tained. The investment credit with reamortization is another form of write-spect to pollution facilities is essential off. Thus, I do not see that that is re- if we are to maintain and advance sponsive to the problem.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the Acting Secretary of the Treasury concerning the Gore amendment be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY,
Washington, D.C.

Hon. CARL T. CURTIS,
U.S. Senate,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR CURTIS: This is in response to your request for the Treasury Depart

our efforts to protect our air and water environment from pollution.

Massive private investment in industrial air and water quality control devices are needed to insure that our production processes do not destroy the environment in which we live. Two recent reports, "The Cost of Clean Water," Senate Document 90-65, presented to the Senate January 10, 1968, and "The Cost of Clean Air," Senate Document 91-40, June 1969, describe in detail the magnitude of the private investment required.

The clean water report indicates ment's views with respect to Amendment that the cash outlays needed to meet No. 389, introduced by Senator Gore. The industrial waste treatment requirepurpose of the amendment is to strike from ments for fiscal years 1969 through the bill the provisions for 5-year amortiza- 1973 are between $2.6 and $4.6 biltion for the cost of rehabilitation of low-in

come housing, railroad rolling stock and pollion. The clean air report estimates

lution control facilities.

The Treasury Department amendment.

the cost of control of just particulate opposes the emissions and sulfur oxides at beween $266 and $500 million for fiscal years 1971 through 1974.

The first of these provisions will encourage the rehabilitation of low-income rental housUntil a better method of stimulating ing units which is needed if we are to provide adequate housing for all our citizens. needed private investment and GovThe provision for amortization of railroad ernment assistance to private indusrolling stock will alleviate the critical shortage of railroad cars and has been provided try in reaching this important public in lieu of any exception to the investment goal is achieved, the investment credit credit. While we have been concerned about the amortization of pollution control facilities, we believe that the provision in the

Senate bill has been sufficiently narrowed to prevent abuse.

represents the best-known technique. The revenue loss entailed in this approach will be offset many times by the reduction in other public invest

It is important to note that all three of ments to counteract environmental

degradation. Next year, the Commit

The result was announced-yeas 3,

tee on Public Works will look into nays 92, ***.
other ways and means of effectively
accomplishing the result we seek. In

So Mr. GORE's amendment was re

the meantime, the provisions of sec-jected.

tion 707 of the bill offer the best hope Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, I move for insuring the full participation of to reconsider the vote by which the the industrial community in our earn- amendment was rejected. est efforts for a better, cleaner air and water environment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the amendment has now expired.

Mr. LONG. I move to lay that motion on the table.

The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

[p. 37888]

1.4a (5) (c) Dec. 22: Senate agrees to conference report, p. 40718

[No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

1.4a (5) (d) Dec. 22: House debates and agrees to conference report, pp. 40820, 40900

[No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

Sec.

1.5 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ACT

AS AMENDED

49 U.S.C. §§1651, 1653(f), 1655(g), 1656 (1968)

1651. Congressional declaration of purpose.

1652. Establishment of Department.

(a) Desigation and appointment of Secretary of Transportation.
(b) Under Secretary; appointment; functions, powers, and duties.
(c) Assistant Secretaries; General Counsel; appointment; functions,
powers, and duties.

(d) Assistant Secretary for Administration; appointment; func-
tions, powers, and duties.

(e) Federal Highway Administration; Federal Railroad Administration; Federal Aviation Administration; establishment; Administrators and Deputy Federal Aviation Administrator; appointment, functions, powers and duties; transfer of functions.

(f) National Traffic Safety Bureau; National Highway Safety Bureau; establishment; appointment of Directors; transfer and continuation of office of Federal Highway Administrator under title of Director of Public Roads.

1653. General provisions.

(a) Responsibilities of Secretary of Transportation; leadership, consultation, and coordination.

(b) Congressional policy standards for transportation; prohibition againnst adoption of standards or policy without appropriate Congressional action.

(c) Judicial review of orders of the Secretary, National Transportation Safety Board, and Administrators.

(d) Carryover of authority to Secretary, Administrators, and National Transportation Safety Board from departments and agencies formerly exercising functions and duties.

(e) Safety record of applicants seeking operating authority from Interstate Commerce Commission.

(f) Maintenance and enhancement of natural beauty of land traversed by transportation lines.

(g) Consultation with Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; annual report to the President for submission to Congress.

1654. National Transportation Safety Board.

(a) Establishment.

(b) Functions, powers, and duties of Board.

(c) Aircraft accident investigations.

(d) Transportation safety; investigation of transportation accidents; recommendations.

(e) Publication of reports, orders, decisions, rules, and regulations. (f) Independent status of Board.

(g) Annual report and recommendations to Congress.

(h) Membership of Board; appointment and political affiliations of members; fitness; removal for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.

(i) Term of office of members; filling of vacancies.

« PreviousContinue »